Corporate insolvency resolution process amended with expanded disclosure, guarantor asset transfer rules, and new dissolution and restoration procedur...
Page of 4813
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
2621 to 2640 of 96257 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
A High Court, exercising limited Section 34 review, sustained the arbitrator's view that extensions of time justified corresponding rescheduling of milestones, so release of the withheld milestone amount was proper. It quashed interest on that withheld amount because the contract imposed an absolute bar on any interest. The court corrected the final bill figure to reflect an admitted clerical error. It also disallowed the post-GST differential tax claim for lack of proof of actual payment and annulled prolongation damages for want of able loss under Section 73. The refund of penalty for delay in the sample flat, along with interest other than on the withheld amount and costs, was maintained.
A High Court, exercising limited Section 34 review, sustained the arbitrator's view that extensions of time justified corresponding rescheduling of milestones, so release of the withheld milestone amount was proper. It quashed interest on that withheld amount because the contract imposed an absolute bar on any interest. The court corrected the final bill figure to reflect an admitted clerical error. It also disallowed the post-GST differential tax claim for lack of proof of actual payment and annulled prolongation damages for want of able loss under Section 73. The refund of penalty for delay in the sample flat, along with interest other than on the withheld amount and costs, was maintained.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4813 
Join Channel 
